somersetchris wrote:
Not quadrupling through Camden Rd will create a very nasty pinch
point. As soon as trains get west of Camden Rd they are effectively on
four track anyway (2 via Gospel Oak and 2 via Primrose Hill). With it
also effectively going to be 4 tracks east of Dalston (2 to New Cross
and 2 to Stratford) what is needed is 4 tracks between Dalston and
Camden Rd. This is going to remove a lot of pathways for freight and
non LOROL trains from the NLL.

There would still have been a 2 track junction (pinch point) at the west end
of Camden Rd anyway.

If you read all the articles on the ORR site you'll see NR firmly believe
all the usable freight paths are still available, because for the odd few
hours when the Stratford - Camden half hourly service will still run it
coincides with peaks on the GE and WCML slows, which prevent the freight
running onto and off the NLL anyway...

Paul

Thought I posted this earlier but it doesn't seem to have
appearred.....

On 16 Sep, 18:55, "Paul Scott" wrote:
somersetchris wrote:
Not quadrupling through Camden Rd will create a very nasty pinch
point. As soon as trains get west of Camden Rd they are effectively on
four track anyway (2 via Gospel Oak and 2 via Primrose Hill). With it
also effectively going to be 4 tracks east of Dalston (2 to New Cross
and 2 to Stratford) what is needed is 4 tracks between Dalston and
Camden Rd. This is going to remove a lot of pathways for freight and
non LOROL trains from the NLL.

There would still have been a 2 track junction (pinch point) at the west end
of Camden Rd anyway.

Given the works to be/being performed to enlarge the Hampstead tunnel
and bridges on the Gospel Oak routes to enable more freight to reach
the WCML without crossing the GEML or using the NLL, could the NLL not
have effectively become a two track railway from Stratford to Gospel
Oak (all OLE), with the ELL being a segregated (all DC) two track
railway from Dalston to Queens Park/Watford? (ignoring the Bakerloo
reextension) All that would have been required is for the pinch point
to the west of Camden Road that was to remain in the original works to
be upgraded by widening the viaduct for 10-odd metres or so, and a
crossover would have enabled any remaining NLL freight to access
Primrose Hill as required. Said freight wouldn't have dedicated refuge
loops, but then most of it'd probably be running via the far quieter
Gospel Oak route instead.

If they do decide to revisit Camden to finish the job, I do hope they
consider the benefits of doing as much as they can at once given the
disruption it'll cause to the line.

On 16 Sep, 22:25, Jamie Thompson wrote:

Thought I posted this earlier but it doesn't seem to have
appearred.....

On 16 Sep, 18:55, "Paul Scott" wrote:

somersetchris wrote:
Not quadrupling through Camden Rd will create a very nasty pinch
point. As soon as trains get west of Camden Rd they are effectively on
four track anyway (2 via Gospel Oak and 2 via Primrose Hill). With it
also effectively going to be 4 tracks east of Dalston (2 to New Cross
and 2 to Stratford) what is needed is 4 tracks between Dalston and
Camden Rd. This is going to remove a lot of pathways for freight and
non LOROL trains from the NLL.

There would still have been a 2 track junction (pinch point) at the west end
of Camden Rd anyway.

Given the works to be/being performed to enlarge the Hampstead tunnel
and bridges on the Gospel Oak routes to enable more freight to reach
the WCML without crossing the GEML or using the NLL, could the NLL not
have effectively become a two track railway from Stratford to Gospel
Oak (all OLE), with the ELL being a segregated (all DC) two track
railway from Dalston to Queens Park/Watford? (ignoring the Bakerloo
reextension) *All that would have been required is for the pinch point
to the west of Camden Road that was to remain in the original works to
be upgraded by widening the viaduct for 10-odd metres or so, and a
crossover would have enabled any remaining NLL freight to access
Primrose Hill as required. Said freight wouldn't have dedicated refuge
loops, but then most of it'd probably be running via the far quieter
Gospel Oak route instead.


That's an interesting idea, one I've not come across before (at least
not in that exact form). We've certainly discussed four tracking to
the west of Camden Road before (actually in the context of sending
Eurostars from the CTRL/HS1 along the NLL then via Primrose Hill and
up the WCML), which would require minimal acquisition of land and
demolition of property (it'd cause considerable disruption whilst it
was being constructed, but you can't make an omelette... etc).
Possible problems are freight blocking up the GOBLIN route - the LO
passenger services are set to become more frequent - and also the
freight crossing at the junction onto the Primrose Hill route.

Arguably the problem here is the freight trains - without them then
the DC lines to Watford would more or less become an extension of the
ELL with some Bakerloo trains along for the ride as well, especially
if one sacrificed the DC line service to Euston - and arguably one
could ditch the Bakerloo line service as well, as the frequent LO
service could possibly be sufficient. But add in the freight trains
and the potential for delays increases - though the voice of reality
in the back of my head is saying that even without freights, there's
more than enough that might go wrong. The absolutely critical thing
for ELL trains is that they hit their slot on the mainline to Croydon
- if they don't, then they put a spanner in the works for the rest of
the Southern Region (well, the south central division at least).


If they do decide to revisit Camden to finish the job, I do hope they
consider the benefits of doing as much as they can at once given the
disruption it'll cause to the line.


I absolutely agree. The other problem with saying things like 'well
one day they can revisit this should the need for it grow' (as I did
upthread) is that the momentum gets lost and nothing ever happens...
I'm just hoping that ELLX phase 2 doesn't wither and die in this
manner. (The cynic in me says that, despite Boris' pronouncements of
its importance, the electoral landscape of this part of south London
might mean that pushing this through is not a top priority, though of
course it is the Treasury that holds the purse strings on this one -
make it happen, Darling!).

On 17 Sep, 06:25, Jamie Thompson wrote:
Given the works to be/being performed to enlarge the Hampstead tunnel
and bridges on the Gospel Oak routes to enable more freight to reach
the WCML without crossing the GEML or using the NLL,

This only applies to freight from the Tilbury direction. The NLL is
still going to be the most practical route for GEML freight. See the
diagram he
http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...on-is-for.html

A lot of other current NLL traffic could not easily be diverted away.
We're a long way from it being a segregated passenger route.

U

On 18 Sep, 01:09, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 17 Sep, 06:25, Jamie *Thompson wrote:

Given the works to be/being performed to enlarge the Hampstead tunnel
and bridges on the Gospel Oak routes to enable more freight to reach
the WCML without crossing the GEML or using the NLL,

This only applies to freight from the Tilbury direction. The NLL is
still going to be the most practical route for GEML freight. See the
diagram hehttp://londonconnections.blogspot.co...ground-disrupt...

A lot of other current NLL traffic could not easily be diverted away.
We're a long way from it being a segregated passenger route.

U

Well, if TPTB were so inclined, a (relatively) simple bridged curve
could connect the GEML slows to the Goblin:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=...ac71f8b35d6743
....I think there's ample room.

Just out of interest, what sort of "other current" traffic does the
NLL have, other than passengers, GEML freight, and Tilbury freight
(which I'm guessing includes all chunnel traffic)? I can't think of
anything else.

On 18 Sep, 01:09, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 17 Sep, 06:25, Jamie Thompson wrote:

Given the works to be/being performed to enlarge the Hampstead tunnel
and bridges on the Gospel Oak routes to enable more freight to reach
the WCML without crossing the GEML or using the NLL,

This only applies to freight from the Tilbury direction. The NLL is
still going to be the most practical route for GEML freight. See the
diagram hehttp://londonconnections.blogspot.co...ground-disrupt...

A lot of other current NLL traffic could not easily be diverted away.
We're a long way from it being a segregated passenger route.

U

Well, if TPTB were so inclined, a (relatively) simple bridged curve
could connect the GEML slows to the Goblin:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=...ac71f8b35d6743
....I think there's ample room.

Just out of interest, what sort of "other current" traffic does the
NLL have, other than passengers, GEML freight, and Tilbury freight
(which I'm guessing includes all chunnel traffic)? I can't think of
anything else.

On 18 Sep, 22:07, Jamie Thompson wrote:
Well, if TPTB were so inclined, a (relatively) simple bridged curve
could connect the GEML slows to the Goblin:http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=...=51.550665,0.0...
...I think there's ample room.

GEML freight runs on the fasts, on the north side.

Just out of interest, what sort of "other current" traffic does the
NLL have, other than passengers, GEML freight, and Tilbury freight
(which I'm guessing includes all chunnel traffic)? I can't think of
anything else.

The connections at the other end are more important - the Goblin has
no equivalent to Canonbury tunnel, meaning southbound ECML trains
can't get onto it eaily. Plus anything electric. Plus various
occasional traffic like diverted sleepers heading for the ECML.

U

"Mr Thant" wrote

The connections at the other end are more important - the Goblin has
no equivalent to Canonbury tunnel, meaning southbound ECML trains
can't get onto it eaily. Plus anything electric. Plus various
occasional traffic like diverted sleepers heading for the ECML.

OTOH there is no access from the NLL to the MML, whereas from the Goblin
there is the connection via Junction Road Junction.

Peter

On Fri, 19 Sep 2008, Peter Masson wrote:

"Mr Thant" wrote

The connections at the other end are more important - the Goblin has no
equivalent to Canonbury tunnel, meaning southbound ECML trains can't
get onto it eaily. Plus anything electric. Plus various occasional
traffic like diverted sleepers heading for the ECML.

OTOH there is no access from the NLL to the MML, whereas from the Goblin
there is the connection via Junction Road Junction.

That is a brilliant name for a junction.

tom

--
got a DOCTORATE in cold ROCKIN' IT

Peter Masson wrote:

OTOH there is no access from the NLL to the MML, whereas from the Goblin
there is the connection via Junction Road Junction.

There's the Dudding Hill Loop if you've got a Diesel. That's got
connections from the MML in both directions, though you'd need to
reverse at Acton if you needed to head Eastbound on the NLL.

Cheers,

Barry